Accuracy of Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Detection in Exhaled Breath Compared to Reverse-transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) for Diagnosis of COVID-19: An Evidence-based Case Report

IF 0.5 Q4 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
A. Susanto, H. Agustin, M. Taufik, M. Rahman, Moulid Hidayat
{"title":"Accuracy of Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Detection in Exhaled Breath Compared to Reverse-transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) for Diagnosis of COVID-19: An Evidence-based Case Report","authors":"A. Susanto, H. Agustin, M. Taufik, M. Rahman, Moulid Hidayat","doi":"10.5812/archcid-119263","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a contagious infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The World Health Organization (WHO) declared this infection a global pandemic in 2020. In addition, various methods have been developed to diagnose COVID-19 rapidly and accurately to reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) as a gold standard method. One of these methods is the detection of volatile organic compounds (VOC) in exhaled breath. Objectives: The aim was to collect and investigate studies on the accuracy of VOC detection as a diagnostic method for COVID-19. Methods: A literature search was performed in five electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, ProQuest, EBSCOhost, and Scopus, along with hand searching. The search was conducted in the titles and abstracts of articles using keywords and their equivalent terms, combined with the Boolean operators (OR and AND). The search results were then selected according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and compatibility with the Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes (PICO) framework. Results: Based on the search results, two cross-sectional studies by Wintjens et al. and Ruszkiewicz et al. were selected, which were then critically appraised. Both studies showed good validity. Wintjens et al. reported 86% sensitivity and 54% specificity for their method, with a positive predictive value (PPV) and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 40% and 92%, respectively. Besides, Ruszkiewicz et al., who conducted a study in two different locations, reported 82.4% sensitivity and 75% specificity for their method in Edinburgh (UK), with PPV and NPV of 87.5% and 66.7%, respectively, while they reported 90% sensitivity and 80% specificity in Dortmund (Germany), with PPV and NPV of 45% and 97.8%, respectively. The accuracy of these three methods was 62%, 80%, and 82%, respectively. Conclusions: Detection of VOCs from exhaled breath can be a rapid, cost-effective, and simple method for diagnosing COVID-19. However, the accuracy of this method is still relatively low (62 - 82%) and inconsistent; therefore, it is only recommended for screening.","PeriodicalId":51793,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Clinical Infectious Diseases","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Clinical Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5812/archcid-119263","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a contagious infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The World Health Organization (WHO) declared this infection a global pandemic in 2020. In addition, various methods have been developed to diagnose COVID-19 rapidly and accurately to reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) as a gold standard method. One of these methods is the detection of volatile organic compounds (VOC) in exhaled breath. Objectives: The aim was to collect and investigate studies on the accuracy of VOC detection as a diagnostic method for COVID-19. Methods: A literature search was performed in five electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, ProQuest, EBSCOhost, and Scopus, along with hand searching. The search was conducted in the titles and abstracts of articles using keywords and their equivalent terms, combined with the Boolean operators (OR and AND). The search results were then selected according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and compatibility with the Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes (PICO) framework. Results: Based on the search results, two cross-sectional studies by Wintjens et al. and Ruszkiewicz et al. were selected, which were then critically appraised. Both studies showed good validity. Wintjens et al. reported 86% sensitivity and 54% specificity for their method, with a positive predictive value (PPV) and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 40% and 92%, respectively. Besides, Ruszkiewicz et al., who conducted a study in two different locations, reported 82.4% sensitivity and 75% specificity for their method in Edinburgh (UK), with PPV and NPV of 87.5% and 66.7%, respectively, while they reported 90% sensitivity and 80% specificity in Dortmund (Germany), with PPV and NPV of 45% and 97.8%, respectively. The accuracy of these three methods was 62%, 80%, and 82%, respectively. Conclusions: Detection of VOCs from exhaled breath can be a rapid, cost-effective, and simple method for diagnosing COVID-19. However, the accuracy of this method is still relatively low (62 - 82%) and inconsistent; therefore, it is only recommended for screening.
呼气中挥发性有机化合物(VOC)检测与逆转录酶聚合酶链反应(RT-PCR)诊断COVID-19的准确性比较:一项基于证据的病例报告
背景:2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)是由严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2型(SARS-CoV-2)引起的传染性传染病。世界卫生组织(世界卫生组织)于2020年宣布这种感染为全球大流行。此外,已开发出多种快速准确诊断新冠肺炎的方法,将逆转录聚合酶链式反应(RT-PCR)作为金标准方法。其中一种方法是检测呼出气体中的挥发性有机化合物(VOC)。目的:收集和调查VOC检测作为新冠肺炎诊断方法准确性的研究。方法:在PubMed、Cochrane Library、ProQuest、EBSCOhost和Scopus五个电子数据库中进行文献检索,并进行手工检索。使用关键词及其等效术语,结合布尔运算符(OR和and),对文章的标题和摘要进行搜索。然后根据纳入和排除标准以及与人群、干预、控制和结果(PICO)框架的兼容性来选择搜索结果。结果:根据搜索结果,选择了Wintjens等人和Ruszkiewicz等人的两项横断面研究,然后对其进行了批判性评价。两项研究都显示出良好的有效性。Wintjens等人报告了他们的方法86%的灵敏度和54%的特异性,阳性预测值(PPV)和阴性预测值(NPV)分别为40%和92%。此外,Ruszkiewicz等人在两个不同的地点进行了一项研究,他们在爱丁堡(英国)报告了他们的方法的82.4%的灵敏度和75%的特异性,PPV和NPV分别为87.5%和66.7%,而在多特蒙德(德国)报告了90%的灵敏度和80%的特异性。这三种方法的准确率分别为62%、80%和82%。结论:检测呼出气体中的挥发性有机物是诊断新冠肺炎的一种快速、经济、简单的方法。然而,该方法的准确率仍然相对较低(62-82%),并且不一致;因此,只建议进行筛查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: Archives of Clinical Infectious Diseases is a peer-reviewed multi-disciplinary medical publication, scheduled to appear quarterly serving as a means for scientific information exchange in the international medical forum. The journal particularly welcomes contributions relevant to the Middle-East region and publishes biomedical experiences and clinical investigations on prevalent infectious diseases in the region as well as analysis of factors that may modulate the incidence, course, and management of infectious diseases and pertinent medical problems in the Middle East.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信